Carbon dioxide in the ocean acts like alcohol on fish, leaving them less able to judge risks and prone to losing their senses. The intoxication adds to the threats that global warming and ocean acidification pose to marine ecosystems.

Predicted future CO2 levels have been found to alter sensory responses and behaviour of marine fishes. Changes include increased boldness and activity, loss of behavioural lateralization, altered auditory preferences and impaired olfactory function1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Impaired olfactory function makes larval fish attracted to odours they normally avoid, including ones from predators and unfavourable habitats1, 3. These behavioural alterations have significant effects on mortality that may have far-reaching implications for population replenishment, community structure and ecosystem function2, 6. However, the underlying mechanism linking high CO2 to these diverse responses has been unknown. Here we show that abnormal olfactory preferences and loss of behavioural lateralization exhibited by two species of larval coral reef fish exposed to high CO2 can be rapidly and effectively reversed by treatment with an antagonist of the GABA-A receptor. GABA-A is a major neurotransmitter receptor in the vertebrate brain. Thus, our results indicate that high CO2 interferes with neurotransmitter function, a hitherto unrecognized threat to marine populations and ecosystems. Given the ubiquity and conserved function of GABA-A receptors, we predict that rising CO2 levels could cause sensory and behavioural impairment in a wide range of marine species, especially those that tightly control their acid–base balance through regulatory changes in HCO3− and Cl− levels.

That researchers chose the colorful and movie-famous clownfish as the subject for their study instead of the toadfish or other, less photogenic, aquatic reef dwellers, has nothing to do with winning headlines and funding. Probably.

That researchers chose the colorful and movie-famous clownfish as the subject for their study instead of the toadfish or other, less photogenic, aquatic reef dwellers, has nothing to do with winning headlines and funding. Probably.

###

Well, Clownfish, besides being able to be bread in captivity, have a lot of characteristics that make them more suited then other marine species for study. That being said, this whole line of research is bunk. BTW, I have actually kept Clownfish in elevated CO2 conditions so I can really call BS on this.

Clownfish are naturally VERY aggressive. I seriously doubt that these kids playing scientist have any sort of useful metric.

This is good news, with fish being less able to judge risks, fishing should get a whole lot easier, (since fish used to be great at judging risks) and the prices at your favorite seafood restaurant should be dropping.

Pu-leeeeeez. Add to their long list of iconic cute-creatures. Dolphins. Whales. Bears (though they are anything but cute close-up). Pandas. Nemo…er, Clownfish. Dumb it down to the media-star creatures.

Amazingly, Nemo is pictured swimming through a toxic forest of anemone tentacles, so yes indeed a little bit of CO2 is going to affect him???

And all the while never wonder how albino crabs and bizarre tube-worms thrive at the brink of acidic geothermal-spewing black smokers? These people have become shameless genuflectors to a cause akin to some wacky revivalist religion. The public is yawning. And forgive the sentiment, but I feel the urge to bitch-slap some sense into some of these ‘researchers’.

Honestly, what next? “Kittens lose will to live with increasing CO2″; or “Cute puppies to be a thing of the past, says climate researcher” or perhaps “Adorable foals at risk – we need to act now, says climate activist”.

“Predicted future CO2 levels have been found to alter sensory responses and behaviour of marine fishes. ”

Am I missing something here??? Is not a prediction something that may happen in the FUTURE,but has not yet occured ??
Sooooooo….how can something that has not happened “have been found to alter” any darn thing? I am so confuzzed. Any help?

Apperantly 900microatmospheres is the CO2 level expected by the end of this century.
Reading the story on the magazine’s website make me think that this was one of those studies with a pre-decided outcome.

“Dang, they aren’t buying the acidification scare angle…… better come up with something else scary – how about CO2 drunken fish …. yeah, that sounds like a good new angle to keep the grant gravy train rolling “

DesertYote is right on the money with his comment. Percula clownfish are commonly kept in reef aquariums, where it’s common to keep CO2 levels elevated to feed the symbiotic algae in the coral polyps and to encourage coral growth. Most aquarists don’t keep larval fish. But clownfishes are extensively bred in captivity at commercial fisheries. It would be interesting to have commercial fish breeders, who know what they are doing and who know a lot about normal and abnormal behaviours of fish, to confirm these results.

The increase in CO2 will require many generations of clownfish. The populations should be able to adapt in the usual way — in each generation, the least adapted will die at the highest rates. Meanwhile, all their predator and food source populations will be adapting in the same way. These people (non-identfied) keep forgetting that they believe in evolution via random variation and natural selection.

It was the wee hours when Mr. Clownfish finally stumbled through the door. Just when he thought he might make it to his bed… the lights blazed on and he heard the unpleasant screech of Mrs. Clownfish “How dare you come home, at this hour, stinking of soda!” she screamed. “You have been down to the reef again, sopping up CO2 haven’t you?!” Mr. Clownfish weaved a little and looked down at his puke stained shoes and timidly nodded. Suddenly, the orange color drained from Mrs. Clownfish’s contorted face and she sceamed “Is that guppy slime on your collar?!” Mr Clownfish felt too ashamed to answer and then she sobbed “How could you? Think of the children” she cried. It was at that moment Mr. Clownfish realized that life was over as he knew it. “Damn that blasted CO2″ he moaned. “Why doesn’t someone ban it?” was his only response. GK

It may be time to resurrect a strategy I suggested quite a while back. It involved an organized effort to report the purveyors of this terrorizing propaganda to local Child Services agencies across the country as serial child abusers. Reports of children needing to undergo therapy as a consequence of all the doom mongering they are exposed to have been ever more frequent over recent years and, given the shoddy basis of most this nonsense, the continued targeting of the most vulnerable clearly constitutes child abuse in my book.

Sorry to say it folks but the concept has face validity. Much however would depend on the ability of the clownfish to maintain homoeostasis in a lower pH environment or to upregulate/downregulate GABA and allied receptor systems. A human who cannot maintain a pH within the normal range of 7.35 to 7.45 becomes quite unwell. Usually the problem is acidosis (ie, a lower than normal pH) with decidedly adverse effects on the central nervous system include anxiety, irritability, and sometimes delirium and confusion. A human with a pH of 7.0 (ie, chemically neutral) can be very sick. So as with humans, so too with fish.

Now that the warmists have lost the scientific argument on AGW and all its variant acronyms, they need another bogeyman to try to keep alive their hopes, cushy jobs, incomes, investments in green technologies, carbon credits and ploitical credibility. Ocean acidification, which is not happening since at worst what we may remotely have is reduced alkalinity is now being banded about, reported in the main stream media instead of global warming to try to scare us into subission. Hence the Hollywoodian clownfish.

Land-based life has already seen a rise in atmospheric CO2 of about 140ppmv during the past decades; from approx 250 to 390 ppmv. Did we humans have experienced any effect on our bodies? I have never seen any report that says so. Not even on smallest of vertebrates. Not on insects, microbial life or any type of terrestrial life.

This steady increase in atmospheric CO2 should impact on the oceans, according to Henry’s law, by increasing the dissolved CO2 according to this law. However, since global warming also heats the oceans, then CO2 is released from the oceans at these higher temperatures. Meanwhile, the oceans contain 50 times the CO2 in the atmosphere, which could mean that global warming releases more CO2 than is dissolved when the planet heats up due to increased atmospheric CO2. However we are not even sure if increasing atmospheric CO2 causes global warming or the other way round, that global warming causes release of CO2 from the oceans.

I an scientifically convinced that the clown-fish species will outlive the AGW theorist species.

Here is my question: Using the reasoning and calculations of the Researchers from the Center of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and James Cook University

1. When the the atmosphere contained 260 parts / million of CO2 (pCO2) how many microatmospheres would have been present or measured on the ocean?

2. The Researchers indicated: Seawater with NORMAL 450 microatmospheres would that be at 260 parts / million of CO2 in the atmosphere OR the present day atmosphere readings contained 390 parts / million of CO2. What did they consider a normal CO2 atmospheric level as there baseline?

3. The Researchers indicated: Seawater with ELEVATED 900 microatmospheres CO2 levels. What would the atmosphere CO2 parts / million be to achieve this level in the ocean?

4. How does one calculate OR cross relate microatmospheres CO2 in relation to atmospheric CO2 parts/ million.
Thanks for the help.
Dave.

If you look on the web for the article (Nature) the supplementary information names a program used to calculate CO2 levels. I can’t speak to it’s validity.
I have read criticisms elsewhere that the pH measurement scale (pHNBS) they use is far from ideal for seawater because of large disparities in ionic strength.

Myself, I would also have asked to see full dose-response curves for both CO2 levels and the drug (gabazine) that they administer. Standard practice. They chose a dose of ~5mg/litre simply on the basis that ~5mg/kg is tolerated im mammals!

“Predicted future CO2 levels have been found to alter sensory responses and behaviour of marine fishes.”

It would be quite extraordinary indeed, in fact, unprecedented, if “future” CO2 levels have already been found to alter anything–sensory, behavior, or otherwise. How exactly does that work? Backwards causality? Time reversal? Wow! What a discovery if true!

Fortunately, they are not talking about “future CO2 levels,” but rather, “PREDICTED future CO2 levels.” So if there’s a problem, the solution is easy: simply quite “PREDICTING” future CO2 levels!

I especially don’t buy this because a lot of marine aquarium keepers have CO2 reactors on their tanks to increase the CO2 concentration to stimulate photosynthesis. They usually then compensate the pH by adding CaCO3 (which they do anyways, to maintain pH between water changes).

But I think the critique included as a part of the article is off. I have a mated pair of ocellaris clowns in my tank that were purchased in 2000 and began breeding in late 2001. They have large broods (this is a study of larval fish, remember), the young are relatively easy to raise, and to the very best of my knowledge they have not missed a single bi-weekly breeding cycle in that entire period of now more than a decade. Though they probably missed when we moved the tanks from Charlottesville to Northern Virginia. That’s why clowns are used, not for the photogenic benefits.

The big issue I see is that brains adjust their neurotransmitter levels over time. SO how FAST did they wiggle the CO2 levels? Just as heavy drinkers become habituated to booze and it takes a quart of whiskey to feel anything, and just as regular smokers need a daily smoke to feel normal, etc. So who’s to say they are not just measuring the response time of the adaptive mechanism?

IIRC, submariners can go to much higher levels of CO2 if the onset is slow.

People keep fish in aquariums indoors and I don’t think they observed the poor fish being dizzy. Improperly ventilated rooms can get over 1000 ppm CO2. A well ventilated room is like 600 ppm, a typical value is 800 ppm. Oceans and seas tend to stay outdoor, so CO2 is lower than that. Now there will be a while until CO2 will increase outside to 1000 ppm, and I think it won’t be exactly the same thing as increasing the CO2 suddenly as they did for the poor fish.
Increasingly acid water? Somebody please tell those pseudoscientists that pH of 8 is above 7, and only below it’s acidic, above 7 is basic.

from: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21355-carbon-dioxide-encourages-risky-behaviour-in-clownfish.html
“When they reached adulthood, the fish were given a choice between a water stream containing the odour of common predators such as the rock cod (Cephalopholis cyanostigma) or a stream lacking predatory odours. Those reared in high levels of CO2 swam towards rock cod’s scent around 90 per cent of the time, whereas those that had enjoyed normal levels of CO2 avoided the predator’s scent more than 90 per cent of the time.”

The control fish avoided the predators 90% of the time. It would have been significant if the exposed fish had only avoided the predators 50% of the time. That would have indicated no judgement was left in their intoxicated little brains. But the newscientist article claims they were attracted to predators 90% of the time. Not 40, 50, 60, or 70 percent of the time but a complete reversal from +90% to -90%. Isn’t that an amazing coincidence.

Joachim Seifert says:
January 18, 2012 at 10:07 am
…..the clown fish gets clownier….. enhancing his performance…..whats wrong with it?
Well, if the sea cucumber would get clowny that would be different….

===================

An enhanced performance see cucumber spewing all over the corals and acting rather clownish ….. ?